Please don’t groan when you read this. This idea could solve some of the problems with “Cheaters”.
I know some other players have suggested a points system before, but it was so complexe as to useless.

While this could be modified, it would solve some of the problems with people coming on to just “Carpet Bomb” for a round and leaving to only come on later to do the same. With “kills” not being the main way to stay on top people would need more strategy (shields, alliances, everyone shooting at cheaters) to be top dog.

The only other thing I would change on the server is that the one with the most kills wins the game be changed to the one with the most rounds won(then kills if tied) to win the game.

I want to hear what everyone else thinks on this. Is this a good idea, bad idea what would you want to change.

Simple is nice but for scorched its not. To really evaluate the skill factor as thats what I think your going for, (yes/no?) is it does not touch base on the “what weapon” and “how many tries”.

While one person could take up to 3 shots and kill a target, it may take another 10 shots (they might be new, its F5 winds, whatever..) to get the kill.. thier marked equally?

Or the baby missile VS death head comparision – Its all tuff to decide.

Next I will comment that judging by wins is not the best way to factor skill. Some people can aquire 10-20 kills in a game but win maybe 1 round. They could have worked for every one of those kills – but when it came down to it someone got them in the end, or that person and another killed each other simotaniously – while maybe letting some 3rd person the win. Who maybe never got even 3 kills the entire game but won the game with 2-3 rounds (I’ve seen it).

The only other thing I would change on the server is that the one with the most kills wins the game be changed to the one with the most rounds won(then kills if tied) to win the game.

I am confused on this one.. If your talking about Apoc servers – those are marked as games won by kills. These are not controlled by Gavin. Otherwise the “regular” servers, which you see the scorched3d stats from – those are NOT marked as Kills to win. Those are marked as rounds win for a game.

Which going back a comment or two, IMO this is not a bad concept being won by kills. People who just spend large cash right away to carpet bomb and get some early quick kills will merely suffer from cash loss later. Its a give and take relationship either get a bulk of kills at once, or get 1-2 here, 1-2 there.. and let that add up.

IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED IN SCORING
1. Eliminate a cumulative skill ranking – Change to some sort RATING system. A player can only have a certain amount of skill. (see post “stat questions”)

2. IF the point scoring is to be affected by difference in ranks (however ranked) , there should NOT be a reduction points for being killed except for killing yourself. It would be best for Kill points not to be affected at all by rank, I could site several problems here. The current system is similar to giving an extra point in sports for a goal scored against a skilled defender

3.
Willis said:

Simple is nice but for scorched its not. To really evaluate the skill factor as thats what I think your going for, (yes/no?) is it does not touch base on the “what weapon” and “how many tries”.

Shooting accuracy should be a factor in determining score or rating (i.e. NFL quaterback pass rating which is not affected by any prevoius skill ranking of the passer, the reciever, or the defender, only affected by the math)

4. KILLS should play MORE into who wins the game. Round wins are determined in part by TRUCES, and large part by position on the map, wind and terrain. MY point is that LUCK plays a big role in who wins the rounds. It is also common for a poor player to get several round wins because good players are trying to eliminate each other first.

I think a great idea for determining the GAME winner would be to simply add round wins directly to kills. That way a player cannot win with few kills, which really are the best measure of SKILL.ALSO: This would lessen the effect that mean players have on another players chances of winning the game.

5. ON MONEYEbonite is on to something with the money divided by kills, but dividing by kills only penalizes players for kills. if i damaged many players without killing them and saved my money my score might be astronomical. The fewer the kills the higher my score goes. I could log on, get money and watch my skill score go up up without any kills at all.

A better idea would be to do the opposite, divide kills by money, the same penalty applies, more money, lower score. This could actually work well since it might encourage players to spend their money and make sure to get as many kills as possible. I think it would be very interesting.Another great idea would be to multiply kills and money aquired, then divide by some arbitrary number like 100, or 100,000

It’s a good system, it would be a better way to keep score, however I do not think it would change at all the amount of “cheating” or poor gamesmanship. One cool idea for your system: I think each time you are killed you could also take away one point (two for killing self :oops:)

Neither work .. as you said a person merely has to get 1 kill and just bulk up in money to have an astonishing factor to help skill.

Likewise Kills / Money – Ebon we can tell was joking around becuase anyone who knows him – know’s he will spend pennies to the dollar and get just as many if not more kills then everyone else.

His money is in large bulk hundreds of thousands at the end of any game he plays. This would factor very negative for people using his technique.

I agree however the skill factor should NOT be cumulative. It should come down to a range from one point to another, how you score in this spectrum – one end means your horrible the other means your perfect.

I view my stats and monitor myself alot, there are 5 things I watch for:

… Kills / Money – Ebon we can tell was joking around becuase anyone who knows him – know’s he will spend pennies to the dollar and get just as many if not more kills then everyone else.

His money is in large bulk hundreds of thousands at the end of any game he plays. …

Thank you Willis, I greatly appreciate that. 8)

OK, I’m tired from working and my bowling league today, so my thoughts are a bit disjointed. Thusly this post will likely not make sense if read as a whole.

Any change will have to come to terms with the one flaw in Scorched3D stats: a Kill is a Kill is a Kill. Whether you kill a newb with a digger from 10 paces or spend 5 shots zeroing a Top player with shields, disabling those shields, and eventually killing him from across the map in high winds, you still get only one kill. Until shot difficulty and/or kill difficulty are factored in, there will never be a Comprehensive End-all Be-all Key Stat indicating the best player in Scorched3D. I think that the best way to handle it, within the current limitations, would be to have multiple lists, like v37 to fifth power. Many players have different ideas of what makes the best player, whether it be Accuracy, Kills, Survival, Money, combinations thereof, or even more abstract concepts, like Kill/Death ratio vs. Top 10 Players.

Boy’s point 1: Cumulative skill rating
He says get rid of it. I say keep it as Gavin first had it, without the bonuses for Round and Game Wins. As it is currently, with Round and Game Wins adding a flat bonus, the rating goes higher the more Wins a player has, which is a direct consequence of total playing time. (More time = more wins, kills, rating) The original skill rating was based on the skill of the players you killed or were killed by.

Boy’s point 4: Kills factor into Game Wins
He says add kills to Round Wins. I feel this unduly removes the significance of winning a round. Personally, I feel surviving to win (or tie) a round is a great accomplishment (maybe because I don’t often do so), and should reflect as much. I would suggest adding one-third to one-half of a player’s kills to their round wins, with one-half being quite generous. Perhaps one-quarter to one-third would be better.

Continue to rank people in the scoreboard by rounds won until the end of the game, when the kills are added, and show the final scoreboard rank by modifiied round wins.

Boy’s point 5: Money
How many times have players damaged someone to the brink of death, but unable to kill them, only to have another player’s shot come in diring the same round and finish them off? Perhaps partial kills should be counted where players get credit for a kill based on how much they damage a player ON THE TURN THAT PLAYER DIED. The sum of the credits should be less than 100% if the player in question was already damaged at the start of that turn.

By the same token, a hit tally could be implemented that counts all shots that do some damage (generating money) to another player. You would then have a Kills for each player, was well as a Damages, and Hits would equal Kills plus Damages. A money counter that tallies money from hits only (a subset of Total Money, basically excluding Interest Earned) could then be divided by Hits.

Again, a skill factor based on kills does not take into account the circumstances of the kill (wind, distance, wall type, presence or absence of shields, parachutes (or lack thereof), weapon used, damage by other player in same shot, firing while damaged, target buried, etc.).

I like the 1000 point scale. Section it off by 100’s, with the middle 200 being one group (900 – 1099).
Kill someone three or more groups above you, you go up 5, they go down five.
Kill someone two groups above you, you go up 4, they go down four.
Kill someone one group above you, you go up 3, they go down three.
Kill someone in your group, you go up 2, they go down two.
Kill someone one group below you, you go up 1, they go down one.
Kill someone two or more groups below you, no change.

Rank players by their current group, and players in the same group would be ranked by the actual score (but not posted on the scoreboard) if all other factors were equal. Overly simplistic, perhaps, buy it should cut down on newb hunting.

I also look for the above stats except for the money/kill. I aggree that i would like to see a filter for the stats (the Apoc stats filter is excellent) to sort players by, thats why i started the poll.

My goal is the same as yours, minimum kill accuracy of 33% I would much prefer that it is over 40% but i make alot of wild shots and often being at work i have to drop the game or round as is or sometimes in middle of shot i have to just quit.

Ebonite:
Thanks for the response, and yes, i thought it might be possible that you were joking, but i dont play often with you and i was not totally sure.

I aggree that a kill is a kill, but there is no reason at all to score players cumulatively because the players number of kills already does that. I like your ideas about mulitiple lists.

The money comments are only for the purposes of using the money awarded to figure a skill rating, i think that the way money is awarded is ok but besides that, money by itself is totally irrelevant to skill, unless it is money management skill. 😛

as far as round wins go, I will only agree that rarely is it a great accomlishment. What do you say to the truces, terrain possition, funky deaths and the like, those are in my oppinion equally importatnt to a players skill in detemining the round winners, and even more so when there are 12 players and only 10 rounds. But at least you agree that kills should be more of a factor than just a tie breaker.

^- That is a key factor in the system, for one person to gain, someone else must loose. This concept should be applied to everything.

Round and Game Wins:

When thinking this concept over, I came to a simple conclusion. Poker.
Anty Up?

Each round starts with a head-count of all players on the map. During each round a player antys or gambles with “12” points. Again we got this loose points to win points concept in play. (Note the quotation marks, because its not litterly limited to 12).

Winner of the round gets all the points. This means a person who wins can gain anywhere from 12 (not counting his own) to 132 (12points * 11 ppl) points for winning a round???? NOPE!

Anything after 4 winners is highly unlikely, but it might be wise to add in some fail-safe measures Say:

if Winners == 5
instead of 12, use 10:

10 / 5 == 2
12 / 6 == 2

if Winners > 6
Instead of 12, Number == Winners
Number / Winners === 1 (so instead of 12, anty could be 7 for 7 players)

And similar to kills, points are taken from players and given to the winner(s).

Game Wins:
There is something NEW I wish to also attempt in game wins. Having runners up. But lets do the basics first:

How to figure the game winner? I say this becomes in concept like the rounds. Each player who has ever played but 1 round in a game anty’s up “20” points. We can only have 1 winner. Anty only occures once, not once per round.

N = 20;
The total points gained in a game in impossible to cap.. lets say 20 other people came in and out thoughout a game.. does this mean a player wins 400 points? AHAHAHA you should know better by now..

At the end of the game, we use YET AGAIN Ebons level concept (I’m not typing all that again.. you know the drill N*0, N*.5, N*1, N*1.5, N*2. )

This means on a peer-to-peer level any player can well.. loose 0, 10, 20, 30, or 40 points.

However NOW is where I think second and third placements could be called upon. IF player == 2nd place, the player receives NO, ZERO, NOTHING for game losses. That 20 point value does not apply to them. Might as well call it 0.

IF player == 3rd place, N, or 20.. gets cut in half. 10.
Like before, taken from loosers, given to winner.

Maddness behind method:

For starters this is not some accumulative algorithm that simply can grow and grow and grow. At any givin time the points a player holds is in prospective to the entire gaming world. Sad because I dislike them, but its similar in sorts to Yahoo! games. People to gain points must have others loose points.

Next is, this concept EXTENSIVELY helps the lower experienced players. All because of Ebon’s theory being threaded in the entire mesh. Take for example Apollo, our number 1 ranked player. If he was to enter a game for the entire length against an entire army of newbs. He is risking himself .. 100 points if he dies.. 24 points for the round he playes… 40 more points for the game.

I totally love the idea of gambling points willis! It would combine the suspense and fun of the truly anchient vice of betting to a 21st century game!

Beer, Pizza, Cigars and Poker…. or just mix a batch of chapped fresh fruit vodka and other yummy juices in a pitcher to make Scorch even more fun…. no wait vodka makes me puke… make it a tequila drink!

Gavin:!!!APPLAUSE!!! KUDOS, THANKS…..
HIGH PRAISE FOR THE NEW ADVANCED STATS OPTIONS!